High Court Upholds Validity Of Meghalaya Teacher Eligibility Test (MTET) For Assistant Teacher Appointments

The Meghalaya High Court while affirming the mandatory requirement of the Meghalaya Teacher Eligibility Test (MTET) for individuals aspiring to secure Assistant Teacher positions, has dismissed an application seeking relaxation in the criteria for the recruitment of teachers in the state. The Court held that the appellants, despite being untainted candidates, were not entitled to any relief.

The application was deemed not maintainable as it sought permission to participate in an interview in a matter already disposed of, and the Court emphasized that if there were any doubts about the previous directions, a review should have been sought.te. The ruling came in response to a Miscellaneous Application filed in a writ application that had already been disposed of earlier.

The division bench comprising Chief Justice Justice S.Vaidyanathan and Justice W.Diengdoh observed, “the appellants are not entitled to any relief. Last but not the least, in a concluded matter, Miscellaneous Application is not maintainable. If the applicants had any doubt about the direction issued by the Court, they should file a review seeking review of the order. Now, much water has flown and that the Apex Court has also confirmed the order of this Court, holding that MTET is mandatory.

“In the light of the judgment in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 985 in the case of Devesh Sharma v. Union of India, the norms prescribed by NCTE have got to be followed and that in terms of Section 23(1) of the RTE Act, 2009, a candidate must have cleared MTET for the purpose of considering his/her case for appointment as Assistant Teacher. In view of the same, the relief sought for by the applicants cannot be granted,” the bench added.

The above ruling came in a Miscellaneous Application filed in a writ application, which was already disposed of on 08.03.2022, permitting the untainted teachers to participate in the fresh selection process.

The counsel appearing for the applicants vehemently argued that the applicants were entitled to participate in the fresh selection process and that the qualification of Meghalaya Teacher Eligibility Test (MTET) cannot be insisted upon.

The applicants relied upon the notification dated 01.07.2020 and contended that the condition laid down in Section 23 of the RTE Act, 2009 was made applicable only from that date and that even though the applicants were unsuccessful in the examination, subsequently, it was nullified on account of HSLC and CBI reports.

The counsel submitted that the applicants as such were unstained and unblemished candidates and therefore, are entitled to participate in the fresh selection process. The counsel pointed out that after induction into service, in terms of Section 23(2), a Teacher will have five years' time to clear the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), which may be mandatory and at the threshold, MTET was not required for the purpose of entry into service.

Alternatively, the Advocate General appearing for the State contended that the present Miscellaneous Application itself was not maintainable on the ground that in a disposed of matter, a miscellaneous application cannot be filed seeking permission to participate in the interview.

That apart, the Advocate General further contended that in the light of the directions given by this Court in W.A.No.52 of 2011 dated 02.11.2017, more so, in Clause 1(c), a person must be eligible in accordance with the present applicable Rules / Guidelines without the necessity of their applying afresh.

The Advocate General further contended that none of such untainted and unblemished candidates shall be treated as age bar if he or she was within the age limit by the notification dated 24.11.2008. Thus, it was his contention that in terms of the notification, a person must be eligible as per the present Rules and Guidelines and that only age relaxation ·has been granted in the judgment.

Additionally, the Advocate General pointed out a notification dated 01.04.2015, indicating that NCTE norms became effective from 23.08.2010. According to this notification, only candidates meeting NCTE norms should be considered for appointment as Assistant Teachers in L.P./U.P. schools. It was emphasized that applicants must possess the required qualifications, specifically MTET in line with NCTE norms, with MTET being a mandatory requirement for teacher appointments, established in 2017.

The Advocate General further stated that the applicants had appeared for the MTET examination thrice and failed in all their attempts. However, this averment does not find place in the present application. Hence, the applicants are not entitled to any relief.

The Court after hearing arguments from both sides, observed, “It is not in dispute that TET has come into effect from 2011. Though the applicants may be untainted persons having unblemished records, for appointment as a teacher, the applicants should clear the MTET.”

“The notification issued on 01.07.2020 is only a reiteration of the previous notification dated 23.08.2010 in respect of possession of minimum qualification. As per the letter dated 01.04.2015 issued by the respondent No.2, NCTE norms should be followed scrupulously, one of which is that a person should have cleared TET for appointment as an Assistant Teacher,” the Court added.

The Court further observed that in this case, the applicants did not clear TET, which has been admitted by the applicants themselves.

“Their case can at the most be considered for relaxation of the age, as if he or she was within the age prescribed by the notification dated 24.11.2008 and not otherwise,” the Court further remarked.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the plea, but refrained from imposing costs.

Case Title: Shri Mofiqul Islam and Anr vs State of Meghalaya and Ors

Click Here To Read Judgement